Arni Weisman
Bhutanese Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay just returned from a walk in Central Park before meeting me in New York this week, a walk that will likely influence his answer to one of the questions I put to him.
I began the interview with Tobgay by telling him that when I spoke with Palau’s President Suranzel Whips Jr. last month, he said that of all the countries in the world, Bhutan offers the type of tourism he wants for his country. Whips characterized Bhutan as “low-density and luxurious.”
Bhutan and Palau have a lot in common. Both are small, environmentally conscious countries that are considered expensive to visit. Bhutan charges a $100 per person, per night sustainability development fee in addition to hotel, guide, and transportation costs.
Tobgay describes Bhutan as a “high-value” travel destination. I asked him whether he equates “high-value” with “high-cost.”
He began by mentioning a walk through Central Park that “cost nothing, but was very valuable.”
And he gave another example: “I wish I had met Anthony Bourdain. He didn't go to Michelin-starred restaurants. He ate street food and thoroughly enjoyed it. He got the most value, the highest possible value for his money.”
The cost of a trip to Bhutan “depends on the individual. If you want to stay in a luxury resort, you can expect to pay upwards of $2,500 a night. Otherwise, you can find a hotel for $150 to $200,” he added.
Tobgay acknowledges the positive economic impact of tourism (“Prosperity is important for sustaining our culture and our environment”), but he refuses to embrace an economic model that doesn’t put people at its core. “We in the tourism ecosystem — I don’t call it a business or an industry — need to foster connections, because if it’s just about commerce, we’re ruining the opportunity to bring the world together.”
I mentioned that Palau's Whips had pointed to the Maldives, a country whose tourism development he felt was the opposite of what he wanted for his country. I asked Tobgay if he could tell me about places that inspire him and places that symbolize things he would rather avoid.
He began with a philosophical introduction. “The importance of tourism is that it connects people, countries, cultures. Corporations can’t do that, but tourism is largely driven by market forces and commercial interests,” he said. “Corporations are always trying to persuade you to consume, and so they risk losing that connection. The important thing is to connect with people. That’s what Anthony Bourdain did. The world has always benefited from, and desperately needs, more connections between people, cultures, and lands.
“Where has tourism worked? Where has it gone wrong? It's simple. Look at where connections are happening and where they're not happening,” he continued. “Show me where locals don't want tourists and I'll show you where tourism is failing. Maybe the Venetians are unhappy with their city because it's overcrowded. Maybe the Australian Aboriginal people don't want people climbing Uluru. If the indigenous people don't want tourists, maybe you need to rethink your policies.
“On the other hand, show me a place where tourists are not seen as a burden or an intruder, but are welcomed as guests with open hearts and minds by the community, and I will show you where tourism succeeds.”
Were there specific practices that could have facilitated both the positive and negative outcomes he described?
“Of course we want to welcome guests. If my house can only accommodate five people, I'll gladly accommodate eight, but if it can accommodate 50, I won't have a house.”
He said it wasn't simply a matter of “capacity,” as the travel industry calls it. More important, he said, was “the capacity to welcome.”
“If you operate beyond your welcoming capacity, whether it’s your infrastructure or the social habits of your residents, you won’t be able to connect. Hosts won’t be happy, and tourists won’t get what they want.”
Tobgay pegs Bhutan’s “welcoming capacity” at 300,000 people a year. “Today we are operating at about 160,000 to 170,000. When we get to 300,000, we will have to talk about it. Can we really accommodate more? If so, we can increase the number. If not, we can control the number by increasing the sustainable development fee. That fee goes to environmental protection, free education, free healthcare.”
It is interesting that the leaders of two small countries considered “developing” (Bhutan’s GDP is 172nd in the world economy, Palau’s is 208th) are more concerned about the human benefits and nature conservation of their countries than the economically powerful countries. The economically powerful countries tend to focus on the number of visitors and economic growth. While marketers in the developed world promote human connection, these small countries focus on delivering it.
